[018] What Do The
Chinese People Really Want? (01/31/2009) First of all, you
can forget about getting the answer to the question from the western media.
This does not mean to say that the western media are biased as such.
Rather, the western media are writing for a western audience and must
therefore cater to their tastes, values, attitudes, beliefs and lifestyles.
Thus, we have articles about
Hip Hop
in China which is virtually unknown over there. Meanwhile, the
"real" China is silently and invisibly (as far as western media reports go)
moving on ahead.

Here is a couple of photos (via NetEase)
that will show you what the Chinese people really want. This is an
impressive sight. Reportedly more than 600,000 Chinese people were out
there (source:
Changjiang Daily). More than 3,000 police officers were out
there to maintain public order.

If this was a mass incident or a demonstration, the western
media would be there instantaneously. As it stands, here is the only
report that I can find in Google News:

(AP via
SFGate) Burning stuff brings good luck:
A man carrying flaming incense sticks prays to the god of fortune,
Cai Shen, at the Guiyuan Temple in Wuhan, China.
On the fifth day of the lunar new year, devotees traditionally
welcome Cai Shen back to earth with fire and pyrotechnics. (AP)

The fact that 600,000 Chinese citizens of one city went out
to pray for fortune does not have much news value for the western media.
That is perhaps understandable. But if you want to write a story about
what the Chinese people really want, then this number does not lie.

Q. Which international incident(s) was(were) most
significant in terms of raising China's international position?85%: The successful hosting of the Beijing Olympics
36%: The economic power of China in coping with the global financial tsunami
15%: The influence of China in major diplomatic affairs
15%: The development model of China
10%: Manned Shenzhou 7 space mission
10%: The unity shown in the Wenchuan earthquake

Q. Do you think that China is a strong nation in the
world now?27%: Yes
44%: Not fully
20%: No
10%: Not sure

Q. Which of the attributes of a strong nation does China
already have?56%: Economic power
48%: Military power
45%: Political and diplomatic influence
29%: Cultural influence
7%: None of these

Q. Which of these attributes affect the international
image of China negatively?52%: Corruption of certain government officials
44%: Poor quality and fakery in products
33%: Environmental pollution
23%: Work safety accidents
22%: Uncivilized behavior of Chinese people
19%: Human rights problems
12%: Lack of freedom of speech
6%: Lack of progress in developing medical care system
6%: An unjust government
6%: Urban traffic congestion

Q. Do you think that the West is trying to stem the
development of China?21%: There have been clear and obvious actions
41%: The intent is there, but there have been clear and obvious actions
11%: No, it is just our imagination
12%: This is something that people say
15%: Hard to tell

Q. How do you think the "China Threat Theory" should be
handled?30%: Object without any hesitation
25%: Respond to the specific charges by retutation and explanation
24%: We will listen to them and improve ourselves
24%: We will ignore them
11%: Don't know

Q. With the increasing power of China, how will its
international position change in the future?49%: Increasingly better
11%: Not much change overall
3%: Increasingly worse
37%: Better overall, but there will still be some friction

For the longest time, I have been the person who wants to
look at 'sea change' as opposed to sharp breaks in the Chinese Internet.
Some time ago, I noted the phenomenon of "human flesh search" in China.
I wrote back then that these "human flesh searchers" might seem to care only
about a kitten-crushing sadist or an unfaithful wife, but someday they will
have perfected the rules and techniques and turn their attention onto
government officials. I was promptly denounced by some blogger as 'nuts'
and/or 'Chinese Communist Party apologist' or something like that. But
at the end of year 2008, there was a flurry of Internet exposÚs
against local government officials in the form of surveillance videos (of the
Shenzhen official who may have molested a young girl); expense reports of
government officials going to Las Vegas, getting European-style massages, and
10,000+ yuan meals; smoking 1,800 RMB/per carton cigarettes. All those
government officials were dismissed from their positions as a result of the
outbursts of public opinion. It is foreseeable that the Internet will
become a formidable force of monitoring/supervision/watchdog at least at the
local (and observable) level.

At the same time, I note that I have
detected another phenomenon that is on the rise rapidly. This is about
the ability by some Chinese netizens to make up seemingly credible stories and
gain acceptance. During the monthly of January, the following cases are
noteworthy:

What Kind Of Communist Party Member Is Chen Hua?
I believe that this case is false, because of certain telltale signs (e.g.
poor writing with grammatical mistakes unbecoming of a Xinhua reporter;
inability to provide any details that would substantiate the case (if Chen
Hua drove a luxury car that was beyond his means, then what make/model is
it?); revelations of details that could place the principals under
peril/retaliation (the writer's daughter had dinner with Chen Hua with a
female friend who was looking to get a job at Sina.com; etc).

The Murder Of
Yang Xin As soon as
the news story came out that Zhu Haiyang decapitated Yang Xin at Virginia
Tech, someone came up with a fake blog to explain the motive. This was
a fake because netizens were able to retrieve the Google cache and showed
that the blog had been registered to a female living in Haidian district
(Beijing) instead of Zhu Haiyang of Virginia Tech before the incident.
A lot of other obviously false information was also spread (including
personal smears against Yang Xin to suggest that she deserved to die
anyway).

Television Ratings Rumors On The Internet
After the CCTV Spring Gala Festival show, someone made up some fake
television audience measurement data from AC Nielsen to rouse suspicion that
CCTV has been manipulating the popularity of the show. This is false
because the author could not get the name of the company right and failed to
understand the coverage of the measurement area of the company.

We have to look at the sad fact that
whenever something happens, there will be some nutcases out there trying to
cause trouble. For example, after the Sichuan earthquake, there were
some people spreading rumors about "there will be an earthquake in Beijing
this evening" and so on. The ultra-liberal view is that people should be
allowed to spread rumors if they wish, because those rumors will be dispelled
in time as the truth emerges. In the cases listed above, someone was
able to point out the gaps and flaws. But what is the social cost when
hundreds of thousands of people have to sleep in the streets because of the
earthquake rumor?

In terms of the 'sea change' that I
brought up in the beginning, I must say that I am really concerned that the
Chinese netizens are getting better at "making shit up" through practice.
At some point, people are going to get so good at it that there is no way you
can tell that one way or the other. It wouldn't be that difficult,
really. It involves running a "human flesh search" on someone beforehand
and then filling in the pieces so that the latter day "human flesh searchers"
would find exactly what you hinted at. Chen Hua? You figure out
what car he owns first and then you drop the hint that he might be driving a
luxury car. AC Nielsen? You track the corporate history and you
research the coverage area before you announce their 'ratings.' If that
should happen, then people will never know what is real or fake anymore.
Isn't that scary?

The converse to this story is actually
positive. Nowadays why would you believe anything on the Internet?
It is therefore incumbent upon you when you run across anything exercise
commonsense (and that works most of the imte) and due diligence. This is
not different from what ever you see in the newspapers.

In recent days, there has been a Rashomon incident over
the the television ratings for CCTV's Spring Festival Gala. As soon as
the show was over, the CSM television audience measurement service (in which
CCTV holds a stake) announced that it had achieved a 95.6% share of the
audience.

This is currently a hot topic at mainland Internet forums.
People are accusing CSM of being biased since CCTV is part owner whereas the
AC Nielsen service is likely to be more objective.

What's the deal here?

This is a fabricated story. PERIOD.

The name of the other television audience measurement
company is not AC Nielsen. It is
AGB Nielsen Media Research. Furthermore, for the results to come
out so quickly, it could only have come from the people meter service (and not
from the diary service which would take a long time to collect). AGB
Nielsen Media Research does not even have people meter systems in some of the
provinces listed above (e.g. Gansu, Ningxia, Inner Mongolia, Guizhou, Guangxi,
Hainan, etc). Therefore, this is a fake story.

(Link, in Chinese)
There is a background behind AGB Nielsen Media Research and CSM (CCTV-Sofres).
Once upon a time, the AC Nielsen company ran a television audience measurement
service in China. In 2005, a global deal was struck with WPP and a new
joint venture known as AGB Nielsen Media Research was created (note: WPP owned
the separate entity AGB Italia at the time). Together they provide
television audience measurement in dozens of countries around the world
(including China). In China, their main competitor is CSM, which is
owned by CCTV and TNS (Taylor Nelson Sofres). CSM has a 90% of the
market while AGB Nielsen Media Research only has about 10%.

In 2008, WPP acquired TNS, which would therefore include its
stake in CSM. The European Union determined that WPP's ownership in AGB
Nielsen Media Research as well as as TNS would be anti-competitive.
Therefore, WPP is selling off its AGB Nielsen Media Research back to AC
Nielsen. Today, it is not clear if AGB Nielsen Media Research will be a
viable business since its major clients are WPP advertising and media buying
agencies. It is ironic that a Euroepan Union decision against
monopolistic power in Europe would result in a monoploly in China.

All of this business intrigue is hard to keep up with unless
one is personally involved. Whoever produced that list of AC Nielsen
ratings by city/province is not in the television audience measurement
industry. That person may have heard of the AC Nielsen company a while
ago and has no idea of the coverage area.

[Full disclosure: This blogger is an employee of WPP and is
involved in television audience measurement. I have previously discussed
The
Statistical Reliability of Television Ratings in China. The
kinds of discrepancies in the fake story here cannot possibly occur in real
life, because the client base would have rebelled first.]

On December 16, 2008, the Haidian district (Beijing city)
People's Middle Court found three defendants guilty of running an "illegal
business." Chen Zhao was sentenced to 18 months in jail (but suspended
for two years) and fined 15,000 RMB; Cheng Wei was sentenced to 15 months in
prison and fined 15,000 RMB; Luo Jianshan was sentenced to 15 months in
prison and fined 15,000 RMB. Normally, people deserve to be punished
when they break the law. But in this case, all those who knew about
the details were sympathetic to the defendants.

How they end up running an "illegal business"?
According to the court, they were guilty of "selling politically sensitive
books that are banned by the state." They were distributing
photocopies of certain books that had been published overseas, including Gao
Hua's <How The Red Sun Rose Up -- the details of the Yenan rectification
campaign>, Gao Wenqian's <The Later Zhou Enlai> and <He Fang's <Notes on the
History of the Party -- from the Zunyi conference to the Yenan
rectification> and others.

In mainland China, it is hard for readers to learn about
the historical truths, especially those truths that the Chinese Communist
Party deliberately covers up. All the mainland publishers are
government-owned, so that there is no way that any books about historical
narratives deviating from the official conclusions can pass scrutiny and be
published. The authors of such books have no choice but to publish
their works in places such as Hong Kong. Afterwards, it is not so easy
for these books to flow back into mainland China. The Customs have a
black list of books that they will confiscate. Certain old readers
have been deceived most of their lies and when they realize what happened,
their yearning to learn about the truths is all the more urgent. Thus,
books that dare to discuss Party history in a bold and open manner such as
those three titles named above became their spiritual food. Actually,
even the senior government officials today will privately consult these
"politically sensitive books."

Today, the Internet is very convenient for young and
middle-aged people to use. But some older people are not used to
reading on the Internet. Besides, there are always some difficulties
with getting through the firewall that the government has built at huge
expense. Therefore, they often look for photocopies of these books.

Chen Zhao is an old man. In his youth, he was with
the Air Force. As a result of the Lin Biao affair, he lost his job and
has no source of income even now. His unfortunate experience caused
him to study the Cultural Revolution. Together with Wang Ninyi and
others, he has published essays about the Lin Biao affair. During the
process, he observed how people around him longed to know the historical
truths. Therefore, he made copies of the books in his collection to
share. At first, he supplied them for free. When it became
economically unviable, he began to charge money. In 2005, he was
visiting family members overseas. His daughter Cheng Wei helped him to
carry on with his business. Meanwhile, Luo Jianshan was the owner of a
small photocopy shop and he really neither understood nor care about
ideological issues and he was only concerned about a business.

Through Chen's help, many middle-aged and old citizens
manage to read some good books for which they are grateful. At the
same time, they were also worried that this may lead to trouble. After
all, this type of action is ripping up a hole in the carefully built
cultural wall. So some friends advised Chen Zhao to quit.
Meanwhile Chen Zhao himself was also worried that the authorities may catch
on to him with so many strangers coming to him for the books. So he
quit the business. But the authorities came after him all the same.
On October 7, 2007 Chen Zhao and his daughter Cheng Wei were arrested.

[013] Does Hu Jintao
Want TO Look At This Kind Of Photo? (01/30/2009) (DWnews
blog)

This is the photo of Zhu Yaiyang, a Virginia Tech student who
decapitated a female student named Yang Xin. This photo shows Zhu
waving the Chinese national flag with the long banner "Warm welcome to
Chairman Hu Jintao" in the background.

Here are the selected comments to the forum post of that
title:

- Basically, the angry young people are all mental
patients and deserve sympathy.

- A murder holds a Chinese flag and therefore all those
who have ever held a Chinese flag are murders. This is a terrific
inference. Have you ever held anything? Just tell me what you
held and I will send you a photo that will sure that you won't be able to
sleep at night.

- This incident is an isolated individual act, so there is
no need to raise it up to the collective level. We oppose feudalism,
of which a prominent aspect is guilty by association. At Virginia
Tech, a student of Korean origin killed more than 20 people in a shooting
spree. If the Americans believed in guilty by association as well,
shouldn't they declare war on South Korean? [Correction: He shot 32
shot and killed 32 persons.]

- When Zhu Haiyang raised the flag, he was killing anyone.
Is there any causal relationship between murder and flag-waving?

- The problem is not with the flag itself. It is the
bloody red flag of the culture of violence that exist in people's hearts.
The culture of violence is distorting the human character.

- This brutal distortion of human character is the product
of the corruption of the Chinese Communist Party and the evil party
culture/education.

- Sick people show up to criticize what other sick people
do. So sad!

- I only want to show everybody that anyone who waves the
party flag is almost surely psychologically warped. You have to accept
that.

- Your logic is so powerful because you can derive
regularities from rare events: A psycho once raised the flag, and therefore
all those who raise the flag are psychos. I congratulate your
democratic movement and may it be as strong as your logic. I pray that
you powerful logic will destroy the Chinese Communist Party and build a new
world of democracy.

- When a person who raises a Chinese flag commits murder,
it does not mean that all those who raise the Chinese flag are murderers.
And there is nothing so controversial about a Chinese person loving China.
There is nothing wrong with a Chinese person welcoming a visit from the
chairman of China. Therefore, these is no causal relationship.

But Zhu Haiyang is a Ph.D. candidate. He should know
what the Chinese Communist Party have wrought but nevertheless he went out
there with a Chinese flag in hand. Then I must conclude that he is a
psychologically warped bookworm. It is no surprise that this mentally
retarded bookworm would kill someone. Thus, this forum post is
reasonable -- far too reasonable. Now I understand why my heart chills
whenever I see a Ph.D. holding a Chinese flag in hand. This blog post
made me realize that all Ph.D.'s who hold Chinese flags in their hands are
killers. Just take a look at Qian Xueshen and Guo Moruo and you will
know that it is a wonder that they didn't kill anyone.

- I puke when I see the five-star flag. This person
is either really ignorant (and therefore used by the Communist Party to
kill) or else they are Communist Party members who will kill people anytime.

- When someone kills, it has nothing to do with his
educational level. It makes no different if he was a Ph.D. or not.
Do you think anyone who has received higher education won't commit crimes?
What is the relationship between education and committing crime? With
respect to his case, I would rather read the speculation from the
psychologists rather than read the rubbish coming from a bunch of political
hacks. At this point, I am disappointed with the quality of the
opponents of the Chinese Communist Party.

- A fake photo that was composed by computer generated so
many comments. This piece of fakery is a waste of time. The
Chinese people must be quite stupid.

- Hu Jintao visited America in June 2006, whereas Zhu
Haiyang arrived in the United States in the fall of 2008. How was Zhu
supposed to greet Hu?

- The photo may be technically fake, but the reality of
the violence of the Chinese Communist Party cannot be denied.

[012] Coal Mine Toll
Statistics (01/28/2009) Can you say confusion? I think
that they are writing news reports based upon these numbers (which I pieced
together).

In 2007, traffic and work-related accidents resulted in 101,528 fatalities (of
which 3,786 were due to coal mine accidents).
In 2008, traffic and work-related accidents resulted in 91,172 fatalities (of
which 3,214 were due to coal mine accidents).

Instead the headlines became "91,172 Deaths in China Coal Mines in 2008."
Why not just show the two lines above?

(Xinhua)
Accidents kill over 91,100 in China in 2008. January 16, 2009.

China's top work safety official said here
Friday that 91,172 people were killed in 413,752 traffic and work-related
accidents last year. The number of deaths was down 10.2 percent from 2007
and that of accidents was down 18.3 percent as the country stepped up
efforts to ensure work safety.

Luo Lin, head of the State Administration of
Work Safety, said the 2008 death toll fell below 100,000 for the first time
since 1995 as work safety conditions improved in various sectors, including
coal mines. Fatalities from coal mine accidents fell 15.1 percent and deaths
from road accidents dropped 10 percent, Luo said, without providing the
specific figures. Figures released by the Ministry of Public Security on
Jan. 4 showed that 73,484 people were killed in 265,204 road accidents last
year. Death toll from coal mine accidents in 2007 was 3,786, according to
the work safety agency.

The death toll in China's coal mines last year was 91,172,
down 15.1 percent from 2007, the State Administration of Work Safety (SAWS)
said Tuesday. It was the first time since 1995 the figure fell below
100,000,the chief work safety regulator said. The number of accidents fell
19.3 percent to 413,700 in 2008. The death rate in coal mine accidents, per
1 million tonnes of coal produced, dropped 20.4 percent year-on-year to
1.182, SAWS also said.

The death toll in China's coal mines last year was 91,172,
down 15.1 percent from 2007, the State Administration of Work Safety (SAWS)
said Tuesday. It was the first time since 1995 the figure fell below
100,000, the chief work safety regulator said. The number of accidents fell
19.3 percent to 413,700 in 2008. The death rate in coal mine accidents, per
1 million tonnes of coal produced, dropped 20.4 percent year-on-year to
1.182, SAWS also said.

[Note: The third story changed the title, but the body of
the text was still wrong.]

The number of people killed in China's notoriously
dangerous coal mines dropped in 2008, the government and state media
reported, indicating the total amount of fatalities was more than 3,200.
Coal mine deaths dropped 15.1 percent in 2008 compared to the previous year,
the official Xinhua news agency late on Tuesday quoted the country's State
Administration of Work Safety as saying. The report made no mention of the
actual number of deaths in 2008, but Xinhua said at the beginning of last
year that 3,786 miners lost their lives in 2007 -- a 15.1 percent drop from
3,786 equates to 3,214.

However independent labour groups have long maintained
that China's mining death toll is much higher than the government says as
local mine bosses and regional leaders cover up accidents to avoid fines and
costly mine shut downs.

Even after the above has been noted, other western media
have boldly piled insult on idiotic re-writing as if they don't know.

China's State Administration of Work Safety
office has said the death toll among coal mine workers fell 15% last year,
compared to that of 2007. The official death toll last year was 91,172, the
first time since 1995 that the figure fell below 100,000. The death rate in
coal mine accidents, per 1 million tonnes of coal produced, dropped 20.4%
year-on-year to 1.182, the work safety office added.

A Virginia Tech graduate student accused of beheading a
fellow student displayed erratic and standoffish behavior in the months
before the attack on campus this week, his landlord said Friday. Also on
Friday, police filed court papers listing items found in a searches of the
off-campus town house occupied by Haiyang Zhu, who is charged with
first-degree murder in the slaying of Xin Yang, and the room where Yang
lived on campus.

Yang, of Beijing, was slain with a large kitchen knife as
she had coffee with the 25-year-old Zhu on Wednesday night at a cafe in the
building where she lived, a hotel converted into graduate student housing. A
Tech police officer arrived Wednesday night to find Zhu holding 22-year-old
Yang's head in his hands, according to a court affidavit filed Thursday.

...

Virginia Tech Police were trying to verify the
authenticity of a posting on a Chinese-language blog earlier this month
under the name Haiyang Zhu that expressed frustration over problems
including stock losses, Chief Wendell Flinchum said Friday. The Jan. 7
posting said, "Recently I've been so frustrated I think only of killing
someone or committing suicide."

The lack of concrete information about the two principals
created fertile ground for Chinese certain netizens to display their worst
behaviors. The first blog purported to be written by Zhu Yaiyang was a
piece of forgery. How so? Other netizens were able to go to the
Google cache and recovered the archived January 7 post -- it was something
completely different written by a female blogger living in the Haidian
district of Beijing. After the murder, someone had modified the blog
posts and identity of the blogger (from female to a man with Zhu Haiyang's
photo). Next, another forum post appeared by someone who purports to be
a classmate of Yang Xin in Canada. This person claimed that Yang Xin was
a slut who simultaneously dated four guys while they paid for all her
expenses. However, the post was clearly false because it could not even
specify which university Yang Xin was attending and what she majored in.
This is just a sample of many other posts that represent the worst of human
behavior.

This Tianya
forum post comments on the sad state of affairs: "It is your personal choice
to sympathize with the killer and I won't object at all. But it is very
scary when someone with no conscience can create smears to come up with
reasons why the victim deserves to die." The title of the post was:
"Gossip is a fearful thing. Yang Xin, thankfully you can't hear them
anymore."

(SCMP)
Short straw dims New Year glow. By Mary Ann Benitez, Danny Mok and Amy
Nip. January 28, 2009.

As if recession and the
prospect of a worsening economic downturn were not enough, Hong Kong
yesterday drew the worst possible fortune stick in a ceremony at a Sha Tin
temple. Lau Wong-fat, chairman of rural affairs body the Heung Yee Kuk, drew
the stick numbered 27 on the city's behalf in the Taoist ceremony at the Che
Kung temple.

A fortune-teller at the temple who read the stick said it
showed the city could not isolate itself from the global economic
turbulence, but that Hongkongers should nevertheless be cautiously
optimistic. Fung shui masters interpreted the stick's meaning differently.
James Lee Shing-chak said it signified possible conflicts between the
government and its people.

Mr Lau said: "It is a warning to all of us that only a
harmonious society with people staying united can enable us to get through
our challenges." The last time that stick was drawn, 1992, saw, among other
things, the arrival of last governor Chris Patten - who unleashed fierce
political strife.

At the Che Kung Temple, there are a total of 96 different
fortune sticks. Of these, 35 are considered favorable signs, 27 are
neutral signs and 17 are unfavorable signs. Lau Wong-fat picked up
fortune stick number 27, which is considered unfavorable.

The four sentences in the poem are:

You should not have to worry about the people being
unworthy
Because all the troops in front of you are actually demons
The Emperor Qin wasted his efforts to build the Great Wall
Your misfortunes come and go on account of you

The associated interpretation on the stick is:

Because you have traitors inside your home
You won't have a restful time
Because your house is unlucky
You will fail to make money

Who are these traitors or demons on the inside?
Various interpretations are listed below. To the extent that the
different interpretations are different ways of finger-pointing, this is
part of the message.

- According to Master Li who sets up outside the temple,
this fortune stick means to say that Hong Kong is bound to be affected by the
global economic recession. Fortunately, Hong Kong is a wonderful place
and its people are great too. Things are expected to become better in
the second half year provided that the people keep their fighting spirit and
a cautious optimism.

- According to Master Leung who sets up outside the
temple, he said that the first two lines of the poem refer to people who
appear to devoted and respectful, but in truth they will secretly go and
lodge complaints with the central government. As for the last two
lines in the poem, it means that the government departments hold different
ideas and do not communicate with each other. As a result, this
administrative effectiveness is poor and the treasury receipts are being
wasted.

- Fortuneteller Mak Lingling said that while Hong Kong
Chief Executive Donald Tsang is not necessarily like Emperor Qin who failed
in spite of building the Great Wall, it is still necessary to be cautious
how government money is being spent.

- Master Chen said that the so-called talents within the
government are actually second-rate and more interested in fighting against
each other. When Donald Tsang and the officials all harbor private
interests and are not united for the sake of Hong Kong, troubles will arrive
one after another.

- The fortuneteller named Tian Tung Tse said that this
fortune stick says that the government is not sufficiently united and ought
to hold repeated consultations to attain social consensus first before
proceeding with its policies.

- Fortune teller Master Lee said that Qin Emperor was
courageous when he united the six nations, but he was too strong-willed and
opinionated. Therefore he called for the government to work closer
with the people. The Great Wall refers to the ten large infrastructure
projects which will use up lots of money but may not win public
appreciation. As for internal traitors, it may refer either to
internal government office politics or clashes between government and
citizens.

- Astrologer Master Yeung said that the fortune stick
clearly showed that Hong Kong is affected by "internal factors." The
troops clearly refer to government officials who fail to perform their jobs
and thus cause the Great Wall (=government policies) to be implemented.
The economic woes are therefore caused by Hong Kong itself.

- Chinese University of Hong Kong School of Chinese vice
president Shi Zhongmou said that the key is that "your misfortunes comes out
of your own doing." The Qin Emperor built the Great Wall to defend
against foreign enemies, but the dynasty ended due to internal problems that
came out of his own doing. "Hong Kong is facing an economic crisis due
to external factors in the United States and Europe. But the fortune
stick text says that internal politics are even more important than the
external factors. He believes that the fortune stick is reminding the
people of Hong Kong to remain united to overcome the crisis.

- Hong Kong Legco member Lee Cheuk-yan said that the China
Liaison Office, the Political Assistants to the Secretaries of the
Government, the Democratic Alliance for the Betterment of Hong Kong are all
internal demons. Lee said that this year will be the 20th anniversary
of June 4th and the 60th anniversary of the People's Republic of China, and
therefore he expects the central government will increase political
oppression in Hong Kong. Furthermore, the Chief Executive Donald Tsang
has recently postponed the consultation on political reform until the end of
the year, which is expected to see some heated debated.

On the 114th birthday of the Kuomintang, the Party Central
History Exhibition Hall was formally established with 250 historical
photographs and more than 90 historical documents. Included were
posters and descriptions of the Kuomintang spy Zheng Pingru, who was the
original model of the female character Wang Jiazhi in the movie <Lust,
Caution>.

Cheng Pingru was born in 1918 and she was the original
model for the female lead character Wang Jiazhi in the movie <Lust,
Caution>. When the War of Resistance broke out, 19-year-old Zheng
Pinru was a spy. On account of the fluent Japanese taught by her
Japanese mother, she was able to mix with senior Japanese government
officials. The KMT government sent her to entrap the Chinese traitor
Ding Muchuan. She pretended to be an innocent young girl. She
failed in her mission, but Ding could not bear to execute her.
Instead, Ding's wife sent someone in to kill her. Zheng was only 23
years old when she died.

Oy! This goes to show the problem with
passivity. Before the movie <Lust, Caution> was exhibited, there was
already a book published that claimed the fictional character Wang Jizzhi was
based upon a real-life heroine Zheng Pingru. This was refuted totally
and completely in the Chinese-language article The Spyring and 'Lust, Caution'based
upon the correspondence of Eileen Chang with my parents. A longer
version of this article appeared in the Taiwan literary magazine INK later on.

Whatever else, the correspondence showed that my father told Eileen Chang
that she could not possibly publish <Lust, Caution> under the premise that
Wang Jiazhi was a KMT agent. Under the prevailing climate of political
correctness in Taiwan at the time, a KMT spy could not waver and fail to carry
out her mission. Eileen Chang took his advice and created an elaborate
identity (i.e. she attended Hong Kong University, she met with a group of
patriotic students, they decided to become an amateur spy ring, she had to
sacrifice her virginity in order to entire the target as a married woman,
etc). The only thing for certain is: Wang Jiazhi was not the Zheng
Pringru character.

For me, the long-term problem is that I am holding on to the correspondence
between Eileen Chang and my parents. If I had release this information
long before the movie <Lust, Caution> appeared, this news story could never
have appeared. Alternately I can insist on protecting her privacy and
not publish any of the letters, and that may cause her to be victimized by
many misreadings. But, of course, she was accustomed to being misread --
according to her letters!

On January 18, the <Xuzhou City Computer Information
System Security Protection Regulations> were approved by the provincial
People's Congress Standing Committee. Under these regulations, it will
be a crime to disclose private information no other persons without their
permissions or to provide or disclose information about other people on the
other net. The originators and propagators may face a fine of up to
5,000 yuan. In more serious cases, the offenders may be barred from
using a computer or accessing the Internet for six months.

The media reports drew strong Internet reaction.
Many netizens were concerned that these regulations will inhibit the ability
of "human flesh search" to stop corruption. "Corrupt officials must
love this piece of legislation." On January 19, the Xuzhou city
People's Congress Standing Committee clarified that the law is not a total
ban on "human flesh search." Denunciation of corruption and exposure
of bad conditions are allowed by the law already, and they will not be
banned on the Internet.

...

The reporter noticed that People's Net ran a survey on the
same day: "What do you think about the Xuzhou ban on human flesh search?"
Mo0re than 90% of the netizens said that they opposed the legislation,
because it was "working against monitoring of government officials by
grassroots citizens." Only 4% agreed that the legislators did more
good than bad.

Interestingly, NetEase ran a survey on the same day: "Are
you worried about being the target of human flesh search?" More than
80% of the netizens said "I am not worried because I haven't done anything
wrong." Almost 15% of the netizens said that they are worried and
wanted laws that would ban the procedure.

...

"We ban certain 'human flesh searches' but not others."
During the interview, the Xuzhou city People's Congress Standing Committee
leader emphasized, "Netizens are most concerned about whether they can
expose bad social behavior, or report the illegal activities of leaders and
cadres, or criticize uncivilized behavior in society. These actions
are not banned in these regulations. They are permitted under state
law and it is the right of the public to monitor the government. For
example, in 2008, the former Xuzhou city Quanshan district party secretary
Dong Feng was denounced on the Internet, and that drew the attention of the
party disciplinary committee which eventually ended with his being
prosecuted. This sort of 'human flesh search' is not banned by these
regulations." This spokesperson also said if netizens found people
going through red traffic lights, or steal things, or beat up elementary
school students, it is acceptable to expose and criticize them on the
Internet.

"The regulations are intended to ban searches about the
normal privacy of citizens and information security." This
spokesperson explained such searches usually serve no public interest while
harming the legal rights of others. They harm personal life, work,
family and state of mind of citizens. Under the civil laws,
administrative laws and criminal laws of China, personal privacy is
protected under by law. Presently, personal privacy include
information such as the age of a woman, the composition of
personal/household wealth, income situation, residence, salary, etc.
'Human flesh search' frequently includes some of these kinds of information.
Therefore, it is illegal to willfully disseminate such information. "I
believe that the majority of netizens will understand what we have to ban
these activities, because we are trying to protect each and every one of
us."

[007] The Chongqing
Shootout (01/25/2009) (Tianya)
Four photos on a hostage situation were loaded onto the Internet.

A man charged into a beauty salon and started screaming:
"They want to kill me." He grabbed a knife and held the pregnant
female
owner hostage in the street. The police set up cordons to keep the
crowds
away and offered bottled water to the hostage taker. Plainclothes
police men
stood afar from the man, but you can see that they put their arms behind
their
back while holding handguns in their hands.

One plainclothesman approached the hostage taker from the
left to talk while another
one pretended to go up to listen in on the conversation.

The man on the right then pulled out his handgun and shot the
hostage
taker dead. The female hostage was safely rescued.

The body of the hostage taker was then taken away.

Is this going to the another Yang Jia case where the rights
of the hostage taker were ignored? Why did they just execute him?
Why couldn't they negotiate with him? Why couldn't they have a
heart-to-heart, soul-to-soul dialogue with him?

The southern city of
Chongqing, which had recently
experienced a strong earthquake, was rocked three times on January 8 by a
strange sound that resembled an explosion. Rumors had it that the noises
were a chain explosions set off by the crash of a fighter jet from the
Chengdu military base. This was
officially denied three days later. Flight training happened as usual at
that day, said the head of the base, and no problems were encountered in the
mission, according to a report on Xinhua Net. He went further, adamantly
denying that base had anything to do with an explosion or the sounds.

According to witnesses, the noises shook the city around 3
p.m., reverberating through three districts in the north of the city. The
sound was so loud that some citizens thought another earthquake was
happening and ran from their houses into the street. Afterward, people found
they could not make a telephone call until around 6 p.m. A police officer
announced later that night that dead lines were the result of a switch
error, not the sounds.

There local news attempted to find the cause of the sounds,
but every possibility was ruled out. The civil aviation department said no
air crash happened, and the fire department received no reports of the
incident. The government of
Chongqing also claimed they did
not received no reports. And so the source of the sounds remains unclear,
with still no official explanation offered.

I personally searched for all information about the three
loud booms that were heard and felt in Chongqing earlier. Then we
analyzed and interpreted the information and their interrelationship.

We found the following information:
(1) There were three loud booms.
(2) The booms were sufficient powerful that windows were shaking.
Certain drivers could even feel their cars vibrating on bridges.
Certain people felt the air move around them due to pressure waves.
(3) When the booms occurred, no eyewitness reported seeing any flying
objects in the sky
(4) An eyewitness reported seeing white smoke in the sky
(5) There were no apparent eyewitness report about anyone seeing an airplane
crashing, or being at the scene of a crash or seeing debris on the ground.
(6) Eyewitnesses reported airplanes taking off immediately after the booms
and many military vehicles on the road.
(7) The various government departments deny there is anything and they ask
the citizens not to be scared.
(8) The latest military announcement: "Xinhua from Chengdu on January 11:
With respect to the loud booms in Chongqing, the spokesperson for the
Chengdu military district air force training programme was interviewed by
the Xinhua military reporter and said that regular flight training took
place on January 8 with all activities ceasing by 17:26. All training
aircrafts landed safely and there were no safety problems during the
training."
(9) Mobile telephone communication was interrupted after the loud booms.
(10) American media said that there was anomalous electromagnetic phenomena
in Chongqing, and they found out that China had forced a flying saucer to
land.

Let us analyze the various explanations:

Theory 1: Military airplane crashReasons against
(1) Military aircraft training should not be taking place over a
high-density city because it incurs extra risk.
(2) Nobody spotted any military airplanes when the booms occurred
(3) If an military airplane crashed, there should not be three loud booms.
An incident with one loud boom would have caused the airplane to be split
into multiple parts.
(4) A midair explosion would have caused debris to scatter over a loud area,
but there are no debris reports.
(5) If a military airplane exploded midair, why is it necessary to sent a
large number of airplanes out to watch the skies?
(6) The military has stated that there was no military airplane crash.
In the past, whenever an airplane crashed, the military may not admit it but
they won't come out to deny it.
Conclusion: This theory is not valid

Theory 2: Sonic boom from a low-flying airplaneReasons against
(1) If a pilot flies this way over a densely populated city, it would be a
serious violation of discipline.
(2) There is a video clip on the Internet that shows the sonic boom when an
airplane passes over a ship on the seas. It seemed that the sound was
heard at the same time that the airplane was spotted. The sound of the
engine was also audible. This is inconsistent with the suddenness of
the Chongqing booms and the absence of visual detection of lying objects.
(3) It is doubtful whether the sonic boom from low-altitude flying could
cause buildings and cars to feel the tremor.
(4) If an airplane caused some sonic booms, why is necessary to create a
military alert afterwards?
Conclusion: This theory is not valid

Theory 3: The testing of an aerospace planeReason against
(1) Why is a dangerous aerospace plane being tested in densely populated
Chongqinq? This is totally unreasonable.
Conclusion: This theory is not valid

Theory 4: SU 27 were fighting intruding F22 jetsReasons against
(1) The intruding F22 jets should be detected by the coastline defense
already
(2) It would be very gutsy for a F22 jet to intrude into inland China
(3) If a F22 jet was shot down, it would be a major political incident since
international relationships are different today than several decades ago.
(4) There is no statements from the United States
Conclusion: This theory is not valid

Theory 5: The most likely explanationWe saw that the military got very nervous after the loud booms occurred
and their airplanes went into the air to keep guard. This proves
that the military knew something before the booms occurred and that
hostility could be involved. Who is the most likely hostile force?
The United States of America. We know that the American Dawn Goddess
can fly at very high altitude. But at that altitude, no booms would
result and guided missiles cannot reach it. Apart from the United
States, the only possibility is extraterrestrial flying saucers. So we
imagine the following scene took place:
At 3pm on the afternoon of January 8, a Chinese SU 27 was conducting routine
military training when the aircraft radar or the ground control radar or the
pilot spotted an unidentified flying object. The ground command center
ordered the aircraft to follow and lock on the UFO, which was warned to
identify itself. When no response came, the commander center ordered
the SU 27 to shoot the UFO down. During the chase, they passed over
the city of Chongqing.
The two loud booms are the sounds of the explosion of the two air-to-air
missiles fired by the SU 27, or else they are the sounds of the explosion of
ground-to-air anti-aircraft missiles, or else they are the sounds of the
flying saucer being hit, or else the flying saucer set off special equipment
that caused the ground to shake.
The third and last boom is the sound of the flying saucer falling on the
ground, or the successful escape of the flying saucer or the sound of a
third guided missile.
So what did the military do after the firefight?
(1) They immediately sent their airplanes into the sky.
(2) They sent ground troops out to seal the scene.
(3) Mobile telephony in the area was interrupted at the request of the
military to seal off information, or else the flying saucer caused the
disruption to occur. This interruption in telecommunications caused
the Americans to get curious. They have the capability to direct their
high-resolution spy satellites to aim at their air and hence discover that
China has forced a flying saucer to land.
(4) All eyewitnesses were told not to say anything.
(5) All government departments were ordered to say that it was not due to
artillery, or earthquake, or thunder, or civilian airplanes, and that the
citizens should not be scared.
(6) Please note that the Chengdu military district statement says: "All
training warplanes landed safely." This says that no airplanes were
shot down during the fight with the flying saucer. "There were no
safety problems during the training" but a fight with an UFO is obviously
not part of training.
(7) When a UFO is obtained, there is a lot of research values with respect
to materials, structure and propeller theory. Obviously, this must be
kept top secret and not publicized.

The above are my analyses which are intended purely for
entertainment. If they happen to coincide with the top secrets, then
it was through sheer lucky guessing.

Hong Kong SAR Chief Executive Donald Tsang arrived at the
scene of the accident about three hours later. The father of one of the
six killed by a drunk driver cried out aloud from the crowd: "Give me back my
son, Chief Executive! My son was killed by that big truck, Chief
Executive! Chief Executive! The driver was drunk! Punish him
severely! Severe punishment, Chief Executive, he killed my son! He
was drunk driving! You must not let him come back after only three
years!"

The uncle of the deceased also called out to Donald Tsang
from the crowd: "Mr. Tsang, give me back my relative!" Donald Tsang
walked up to him, held his hand and spoke to him. The uncle spoke with a
trembling voice: "Mr. Tsang, how can you explain this! What kind of job
does the Secretary for Transportation do? I am very scared! The
next time, the same driver is going to kill again." In his attempts to
respond, Mr. Tsang was interrupted many times.

The uncle continued: "He gets into a car accident and he has
to spend two year in jail. Then he comes back out again and gets into
another car accident! You have to suspend his driver's license
permanently. He was driving a heavy truck. Who is he going to kill
next? ... Ten years in jail not enough because five lives were involved!"
Although Donald Tsang explained that the law has been recently amended, the
uncle only got more agitated. He cried and said, "That was not your
relative. He was my nephew! How can you get him back for me!
Money is useless! I can give you the money and you give me back his
life!" Donald Tsang can only say "I can get you his life back, I am
sorry. There is no way! You are right! Nothing will ever be
enough. I agree with what you say!"

The uncle then aimed right at Donald Tsang: "You are the
leader of Hong Kong at a time when the economy is in a critical stage.
You are the leader. You are the Chief Executive, but you won't help!
The law is so simple, but you won't enact it. This was a heavy truck.
You can amend the law because it does not suit the times. When my
daughter is wrong, I tell her to change. You tell me that you want to do
your job well. Will you please do your job well, okay! Chief
Executive! I beg you. I get down on my knees to beg you, please!"
Then he got down on his knees in front of the Chief Executive. He said:
"You cannot be so lax with respect to those who work for you. The
Secretary of Transportation treats the law lightly. You must change!"

Donald Tsang explained: "The law is quite stern right now,
but if he wants to get drunk, then there is nothing doing!" The uncle
countered: "Then you ought to suspend his license. It would be
permanently!" This forced Donald Tsang to reply: "Yes! I agree
with what you say!" The uncle then pressed him: "So you agree with a new
legislation! Do it immediately! Convene a meeting! I don't
have another nephew! How can I accept this! All five of the
passengers are my brothers!" Donald Tsang could only sad: "I will try my
best to help. I will check the laws very carefully. The court will
follow up on this matter. I promise that I will do this."

Q1. At the moment, many reporters are worried and do not
dare to conduct incisive investigative reporting. What do you think are
the reasons?A. According to what I know, some media have decided that when they lose a
libel lawsuit, the reporter will be responsible for paying the compensation.
Under such circumstances, any reporter doing exposÚs and
watchdog journalism must be treading on thin ice. Therefore, we are
seeing more scenes of prosperity and hearing songs of praises.
Alternately, we are reading reports that skirt the issues. We got
so-called critical reports in the tainted milk powder cases in which the
reporters didn't even dare to name "Sanlu."

Q2. In a series of related cases during
2008, are now being arrested for "suspicion of taking bribes" whereas they
used to be "suspected of committed libel" before. What is the reason?A. When state governments and officials need to counter critical oversight
and watchdog journalism, it is an effective step to accuse the reporter of
"accepting bribes."

Q3. How you view the discussions that
were triggered by the arrest of reporters for "suspected bribe-taking"?A. This is a truly worrisome phenomenon: whenever a reporter files a
watchdog report, he will objectively be defending the rights of certain
interest groups. Certain cynical people will think that he "received
certain advantages in order to obtain interest for certain persons."
This satisfies the requirements for bribe-taking.

Q4. Some journalism scholars believe that
"when a reporter received some advantages, he has committed the crime of
bribery." Do you think so?A. I think that this fully shows the "pan-moral" way of thinking, in which
there is no justification for a reporter to accept anything. Actually,
the crime of bribery depends on whether the person (who is usually a state
employee) is engaged in "official business." If journalistic activities
such as interviewing and reporting are "official business," then surely
refusals to be interviewed, or interfering with news gathering, or using
"public relations" to kill off negative stories must all be classified as
crimes of "interfering with the conduct of official business." This is
obviously unjustified. Reporters are not state workers, which means that
they cannot be the subject of bribery. Therefore, there is no bribery.

Q5. Concerning the "paid news stories"
that abound nowadays, should laws be enacted to ban reporters from receiving
benefits?A: It is not necessary. No matter how well-intended the laws may be
to ban reporters from receiving benefits from the subjects of interviews, the
goals are hard to realize. On the contrary, it may have all sorts of bad
consequences.

Q6. Why is that?A: I study media laws. I have never seen any country criminalizing
the act of reporters receiving benefits. I have never seen any country's
prosecutors charging reporters with taking bribes.

Q7. If reporters can take bribes to
produce "paid reporting" or "paid non-reporting," aren't the bad reporters
being given a free hand?A: This can be dealt with by industry self-discipline. We should
trust this piece of commonsense: A reporter with lousy professional ethics
will not be accepted by the industry. Most reporters will stick to good
professional ethics and not fool around with their professional careers.

Q8. Why is there chaos now which no
longer exist in western journalism anymore?A: This is a symptom of the state of ill health within our journalism
industry. But it can also be said that this was bound to happen whenever
society is undergoing rapid big changes.

Q9. In your people, how can things be
cleaned up in the absence of legislation?A: The media market should be opened up even more. Private capital
should be allowed to be invested in media companies including roles in
operations. When the media companies become genuine market
sovereignties, market competition will regulate media behavior. It is
useless otherwise even if you criminalize the activities by legislation.

Q10. What are the revelations of this
string of incidents for us?A: First all, we must put the Constitution into effect, and provide legal
protection for the reporters as citizens in accordance with the law.
Secondly, we must restrain the powers of the state organizations and workers
to protect civil rights. I understand that the Xifeng incident is being
treated as an important case study during cadre training. I think that
this should not be about letting officials learn how to face the media and the
public and resolve the public relations crisis. This should be about
teaching them to learn how to properly handle the criticisms, complaints,
charges and denunciations and to properly deal with expectations and
supervision.

In my father's new book, he mentioned certain little
secrets in the fight between himself and Frank Hsieh. Although these
matters are quite familiar to me, this whole thing has become something of a
Rashomon, for which I feel wistful and resentful.

My father is absolutely telling the truth, but he is
speaking out too late. Today, the principals can deny everything.
Who cares about a former president in trouble when there are political
interests at stake? If he wanted to talk about it, he should have done
so when he was at the peak of his powers. I can fully understand the
resentment that my father feels. There are two other matters which my
father told me not to speak out. But if my father is going die without
being at peace with himself, he might as well as write down the truth
instead of bringing it into his grave.

Firstly, during the 2008 presidential election, Frank
Hsieh suddenly called up my father one day. He said that he had just
suffered a mild stroke. But he was afraid to seek treatment because it
could affect his campaign negatively. Then he stayed out of sight for
a while and lied that he had injured his leg. He was lucky because the
stroke only caused weakness in one leg. Thus, he was able to lie his
way through. However, he was in poor physical shape and his campaign
was listless for that reason. In retrospect, if he wasn't so selfish
and he ceded the candidacy to Su Tseng-chang, the Democratic Progressive
Party may have lost but not in such a rout. Afterwards, I saw him
insisting that his physical health was normal during a television interview.
This really makes me sigh with emotion.

Secondly, I had said at the time that everybody within the
Democratic Progressive Party took money from my father. Afterwards,
people swore that they did not take a cent. This kind of talk makes me
totally contemptuous of these people. Simply put, my father gave more
than the maximum limit on political contribution and the people who took the
money never filed accurate reports. The excess money has gone to who
knows where, and therefore they had to swear that they did not take a cent.

Back then, the Democratic Progressive Party had an
election campaign advertisement that moved me every time that I saw it.
It was about the Formosa magazine era. There was the silhouette of a
prisoner and a photo of the defendant's lawyer. It was a dark era back
then, but everybody still had ideals and dreams. Today, everybody
wants to get away. In order to cover up their own mistakes, they lie,
they make up stories, they give up their ideals and they sell their souls.

I have never been locked up before. I cannot
understand why people are willing to sell themselves out because of the fear
of being locked up. I also hope for my father: "Even though the path
ahead is dark, I hope that you will not abandon your initial ideals.
Even though your involvement politics brought many setbacks to our family,
you have the strength to continue. In my heart, I will be proud of you
forever."

Based upon my understanding, the so-called "human flesh
serach" is to use the force of netizens to expose certain facts that were
previously unknown. By its nature, it is no different from the verbal
communication in our daily lives. The search is conducted by
individual netizens. However, the open nature of the Internet means
that the search results can become public information in an instant.

Compared to the self-restraints proposed by netizens in
the "human flesh search treaty," the local laws enacted by the People's
Congress of Xuzhou city "against human flesh search" not only showed a
failure to understand the nature of the problem, they also defy commonsense
with respect to the Internet. Given the open nature of the Internet
and the size of the netizen population, how can a city ban "human flesh
search" on its own? People outside of Xuzhou can continue to run
"human flesh searches" on people and things in Xuzhou.

"Human flesh search" certain needs to be regulated, but to
ban or eliminate "human flesh searches" is to a large extent a false issue.
When Xuzhou city enacted the law to ban "human search engine," we can just
laugh it off and pay it no mind. But what really deserves our
attention is that the Xuzhou city People's Congress wanted to punish people
for their transgressions by banning them from accessing the Internet for six
months."

This is probably unheard of to prohibit someone from
accessing the Internet as punishment. For now, let us not even worry
about whether this is feasible. This policy of banning Internet access
is ten times more absurd as banning "human flesh searches." In the
Internet era, this kind of ban is a ban on the citizens' right to know about
public information, as well as their right to speak about their views on
various policies and public issues. It is also a ban on the right to
be entertained, the right to communicate with others and so on.
Therefore, this is an absolute violation of personal freedom. I do not
believe that a local People's Congress has the right to deprive the
citizens' right for Internet access.